The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (137 page)

The second broad category is that of Hellenism. The proposals in this category are variegated and include: (1) Hellenistic mystery cults (M. Dibelius), (2) Jewish Gnosticism and paganism (G. Bornkamm), (3) Middle Platonism (R. E. DeMaris), and (4) Cynic philosophy (T. Martin). M. Dibelius saw a syncretism between Christianity and an Isiac mystery cult with its practice of initiation into a cosmic mystery associated with “the elements.” While Dibelius was criticized for underplaying the clear Jewish features of the Colossian error, Bornkamm saw a syncretism of Jewish Gnosticism and paganism.
¹⁸⁸
Specifically, Bornkamm theorized that the Colossian philosophy promised redemption and deification along gnostic lines, which are stated in the Mithras Liturgy and the Isis Mystery found in Apuleius and Corpus Hermeticum.

R. E. DeMaris proposed a syncretism of Middle Platonic, Jewish, and Christian elements.
¹⁸⁹
DeMaris stated that the proponents of the philosophy were “philosophically-inclined Gentiles” who pursued divine knowledge or wisdom and thus were drawn to the congenial answers of Judaism and then Christianity. He pointed to similarities between Hellenistic philosophy and the Colossian philosophy
¹⁹⁰
but did not give due attention to the distinctive Jewish elements of circumcision and Sabbath. T. Martin offered a novel interpretation of the situation at Colossae. He detected an approach that resembled a Cynic critique of certain practices such as the eucharist and the ritual calendar. Thus the Cynics did not pressure the Colossians to join another religious group; they merely mocked the views that the Colossians already held.
¹⁹¹

C. E. Arnold offered the most persuasive case for the third proposal. He identified the Colossian philosophy as a syncretism of Phrygian folk belief, local folk Judaism, and Christianity.
¹⁹²
Arnold's attention to local background evidence, especially folk religion and the magical papyri, sets his proposal apart from others.
¹⁹³

The fourth proposal differs from the other three in holding that every aspect of the philosophy fits with certain forms of Judaism.
¹⁹⁴
S. Lyonnet challenged the assumption of pagan backgrounds and pointed out that all aspects of the philosophy may have a Jewish provenance. F. O. Francis proposed that the modifier in the phrase “worship of angels” is a subjective genitive denoting the angelic worship of God. This interpretation made a Jewish background for the philosophy a tenable position because the worshipping of angels (objective genitive) seemed to compromise Jewish monotheism. The philosophy encouraged practice of an imaginary journey to heaven where mystics witnessed the angelic worship of God. Ascetic practices prepared these visionaries for their mystical journey. T. J. Sappington identified the error as the ascetic-mystical piety of Jewish apocalypticism.

F. F. Bruce further narrowed this Jewish apocalyptic group to a particular strand:
Merkabah
mysticism.
¹⁹⁵
This mysticism is associated with the vision of God's throne and the heavenly chariot beneath it (Ezek 1:4—28). The mystic's ascent through the heavens to participate in the angelic liturgy and to view the throne chariot of God required the meticulous observance of the minutiae of the Mosaic law, asceticism, and appeasement of angelic mediators.
¹⁹⁶

I. K. Smith's assessment is attractive because it seems to strike the right balance. Smith offered reasons that some proposals are “dead ends.” The first approach is a temporal and geographical dead end. For example, full-fledged Gnosticism postdates Colossians, and Essene Judaism at Qumran is geographically far removed from the Lycus Valley.
¹⁹⁷
The second group of proposals either devalues the distinctive Jewish elements in the philosophy (e.g., circumcision and Sabbath) or draws again upon gnostic ideas that postdate Colossians (e.g., Bornkamm).

According to Smith, category three is plausible but proves to be a dead end as well for three main reasons: (1) Colossae has never been excavated;
¹⁹⁸
(2) Arnold's proposal is based more upon background information than exegesis;
¹⁹⁹
and (3) much of Arnold's material
postdates Colossians.
²⁰⁰
While the proposals in category four are closer to the mark, Smith says that some fall short because they tend to treat the
stoicheia
as impersonal principles or laws instead of personal beings.
²⁰¹

Smith's proposal locates the philosophy firmly within the stream of apocalyptic Judaism. He claimed that strong affinities exist between the philosophy and
Merkabah
mysticism, though
Merkabah
mysticism as a system probably postdates Colossians. Smith pointed to written evidence like the Enochic literature, Revelation, and Jewish mystical ascents to show the contemporary significance of mystical ascents, arguing that the existence of written evidence both predating and contemporaneous with Colossians shows that the Colossian error was influenced by Jewish mystical movements. He also claimed that the
stoicheia
were fallen angels and their domain was the world. The errorists did not placate them or invoke them; they sought to escape their domain through a heavenly ascent.
²⁰²

Smith's proposal is probably the most satisfactory option today, but it fails to account for the distinction between voluntary and involuntary ascents. While some texts demonstrate a fascination by some of Paul's contemporaries with heavenly ascent, descriptions of involuntary ascents by Enoch, the seer of Revelation, or even Paul himself do not demonstrate that contemporary mystics sought to experience these ascents themselves through self-induced trances as one finds in developed
Merkabah
mysticism.
²⁰³
Perhaps all one can conclude at this point is that Paul faced some form of Jewish mysticism. This mystical approach could be called incipient or proto-
Merkabah
mysticism, much in the same way that NT scholars identify strands of incipient or proto-Gnosticism.

Purpose

Although Smith's discussion of the occasion for Colossians is the most satisfactory, he overestimated the importance of having a definitive view of the occasion for the correct interpretation of the letter. Smith insisted that knowing the situation is essential to understanding Paul's response, but many scholars who disagree over the occasion still agree on the main lines of Paul's response. One can easily see that Colossians serves as a Christ-centered correction to the Colossian errorists, whether one knows all the details of their errors or not.

In other words, we may be able to interpret the text with greater precision when equipped with a clear understanding of the background of the letter, but we can still understand the overall response regardless of background. For example, most would acknowledge that
Paul made at least three main points in Colossians: (1) all the fullness dwells in the preeminent Christ (1:15-20); (2) believers are complete in Christ (2:10); and thus (3) they should seek to know more of Christ in his fullness by seeking the things above where he dwells, not the things on the earth (3:1—2). Background questions may help clarify Paul's rebuke. For example, if Paul was responding to mystical ascents in Colossians, the irony is that “their desire to witness the worship rendered by angels is not a heavenly pursuit, but worldly, as it focuses on regulations that are destined to perish.”
²⁰⁴
It is also fleshly in that these ascents and the visions associated with them do not offer help in overcoming the flesh, because they lead to spiritual elitism and divisions.

LITERATURE

Literary Plan

W. Bujard classified Colossians as a letter written for the purpose of exhortation and encouragement.
²⁰⁵
M. Wolter has examined the letter along epistolary lines. Wolter's proposed structure consists of five parts:

1. Prescript (1:1-2)
   
2. Proomium
   (1:3—23)
   
3. Self-conception of the apostle (1:24-2:5)
   
4. Body of the letter (2:6-4:6)
   
5. Epistolary conclusion (4:7-18)
   

Wolter also analyzed the body of the letter along rhetorical lines in four parts: (1)
partitio
(2:6—8); (2)
argumentatio
(2:9—23), which includes (2a)
probatio
(2:9—15) and (2b)
refutatio
(2:16-23); (3)
peroratio
(3:1-4); and (4)
exhortatio
(3:5-4:6).
²⁰⁶

Wolter's analysis is somewhat artificial and arbitrary. This is true especially of his division of 2:8 and 2:9. Commentators almost universally view these two verses as part of the same textual unit. It seems far better to divide the text along epistolary lines that conform to the common Pauline tendency to begin with a doctrinal section and end with a paraenetic (hortatory) section.

OUTLINE

1. INTRODUCTION (1:1-8)
   
   1. Opening (1:1-2)
      
   2. Thanksgiving (1:3-8)
      
2. BODY: THE SUPREMACY AND ALL-SUFFICIENCY OF CHRIST (1:9-4:6)
   
   1. The Centrality of Christ and the Colossian Heresy (1:9-2:23)
      
      1. Opening Prayer (1:9-14)
         
      2. The Supremacy of Christ (1:15-20)
         
      3. The Reconciliation of Believers to God Through Christ (1:21-23)
         
      4. Paul as a Minister of the Mystery of Reconciliation (1:24-2:5)
         
      5. Warning Against Succumbing to the Colossian Heresy (2:6-23)
         
   2. Believers’ New Life in Christ (3:1-4:6)
      
      1. Pursuing the Things Above (3:1-4)
         
      2. Putting Earthly Things to Death (3:5-8)
         
      3. Putting off the Old Self and Putting on the New Self (3:9-11)
         
      4. Extending Grace and Forgiveness to Others (3:12-17)
         
      5. Bringing the Christian Household Under the Realm of Christ's Lordship (3:18-4:1)
         
      6. Encouragement to Prayer and Circumspect Interaction with Unbelievers (4:2—6)
         
3. CLOSING (4:7-18)
   
   1. Commendation of Tychicus and Onesimus (4:7—9)
      
   2. Greetings from Paul's Coworkers (4:10-14)
      
   3. Final Instructions (4:15-17)
      
   4. Final Greetings and Benediction (4:18)
      

UNIT-BY-UNIT DISCUSSION

I. Introduction (1:1-8)

The introduction to Paul's letter to the Colossians consists of an opening statement (1:1—2) and a thanksgiving section (1:3—8).

A. Opening (1:1—2)
Paul opened the letter with the customary identification of the author, recipients, and the grace salutation.

B. Thanksgiving (1:3—8
Paul offered a thanksgiving for the Colossians’ faith, love, and hope (1:4—5), which he had heard from Epaphras, who had apparently founded the Colossian church (1:7). Paul also rejoiced in the spread of the gospel among the Colossians (1:5-6) and beyond them to the entire world (1:6).

III. Body: The Supremacy and All-Sufficiency of Christ (1:9-4:6)

A. The Centrality of Christ and the Colossian Heresy (1:9—2:23)
Paul began the letter body with a prayer that God would fill the Colossians with the knowledge of God's will (1:9) and that the overflow of this knowledge would result in a worthy way of life, that is, a moral and ethical lifestyle that was pleasing to the Lord. Such a lifestyle is characterized by bearing the fruit of good works, continuing to grow in the knowledge of God, being strengthened by his power for perseverance, and joyfully giving thanks to the Father (1:10—12). God is worthy of thanksgiving because he qualified Christians to share in the heavenly inheritance, rescued them from the dominion of darkness, and transferred them into the kingdom of his dearly loved Son (1:12—13), in whom they have the forgiveness of sins (1:14).

Paul highlighted the supremacy of Christ in 1:15—20.
²⁰⁷
The structure of the passage is debated, but most scholars recognize two central structural points: (1) Christ as head over creation (1:15-17); and (2) Christ as head over the church (1:18-20).
²⁰⁸
This staggering supremacy of Jesus is seen not only in his lordship over creation and the church but also in his equality with God: he is the image of the invisible God (1:15), and all the fullness of deity dwells in him (1:19; 2:9). Because Jesus is over everything, he has first place in everything (1:18), and thus God effects the cosmic reconciliation of all things to himself through Christ (1:20).

Paul moved from the sweeping reconciliation of all things in Christ to the specific reconciliation of believers to God through Christ (1:21—23). Paul's readers were formerly alienated from and hostile to God, yet now God had reconciled them through his body of flesh through death in order that believers might stand holy and blameless before God (1:21—22). This glorious work of salvation is a reality only in those who persevere until the end in the faith and the hope of the gospel that they heard and that Paul proclaimed as a minister (1:23).

Paul expanded on his own unique contribution as a minister of the mystery of reconciliation (1:24—2:5). He emphasized his unique role as a sufferer for (1:24) and steward of (1:25) the formerly hidden but now manifest mystery (1:26) of God's good news to the Gentiles: “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (1:27). Paul proclaimed Christ to everyone, so that everyone might be presented complete in Christ (1:28), a task that God empowered Paul to perform (1:29).

The apostle also informed his readers of his struggle on their behalf so that they and others (2:1) would have full assurance in the knowledge of God's mystery, namely Christ (2:2), in whom were all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (2:3). This reminder served as a safeguard against the deluding force of false teaching (2:4), and Paul rejoiced to see their stability in the faith (2:5).

Colossians 2:6—23 builds on this teaching by laying out its implications for the readers. Verses 6—7 show that they must walk in the Christ they have received and in whom they have become rooted and established. Verse 8 directly warns against captivity to the errorists’ philosophy and empty deception. Paul's response was first to repeat his earlier argument: all the fullness of deity dwells bodily in Christ (2:9; see 1:19). Paul applied this point to the believer in 2:10: therefore those who are in Christ “have been made com plete” (NASB). In other words, if
all
the fullness dwells in Christ, and the believer is in Christ, then the believer is complete in Christ and does not need any supplements. Just as in the mathematical realm one cannot add anything to infinity, so in the spiritual realm nothing can be added to Christ who is infinite.